We're not just Right, We're Really Right

Religion, Politics, & Culture: Defined and Explained

Supreme Court

Thursday, September 06, 2018

Democrats Imploding Right In Front Of Our Eyes

By “X” the man with no name

The hearings began on the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh today and this atmosphere resembled a Barnum and Bailey Circus

Official snack of Senate Judiciary Committee

Sen. Richard Blumenthal continually asking for the hearing to be adjourned…well because.  Kamala Harris kept trying to delay the hearing on the basis the Democrats haven’t had enough time to read all the documents from his prior rulings.  Elizabeth Warren ran for every open camera for chances to stop Kavanaugh and try to boost her attempted future Presidential run. Dick “Turban” Durban was at his very best as well, trying to delay the nomination hearings until next year, when Democrats may have a Senate majority.  Here is the main problem with those 4 Senators, competence aside, they reside from; Chicago, Boston, Los Angeles, and Connecticut.  While quite a few people live and vote in those states, I don’t think the Americans who live and vote in the heartland of this country appreciate this one bit.  Need some proof?  Claire McCaskill of Missouri has been largely silent, Joe Manchin of West Virginia…silent, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota…nothing, Joe Donnelly of Indiana, also quiet.  Make no mistake; these Senators know their constituents want the judge confirmed and the games to stop.

Interestingly enough Kavanaugh has released more documents from his past then all of the previous five judges nominated combined.  The excuses about transparency need to stop.  Kind of funny when two of the least qualified judges in the history of the Supreme Court were nominated, nary a Democrat had an issue with the lack of information.  The bottom line is Kavanaugh has a nice family and they are being dragged through the mud by Democrat electeds and their paid for protestors.  Why are these hearings open to the public?  It has become a safety issue, make it press only, show it live on every news channel, but this is a disaster.  Code Pink people interrupting, the Coyote Ugly chick being arrested, people screaming and causing outbursts, Kavanaugh didn’t ask for any of this.  Worst yet, his family was present while going through this grilling. 

The Democrats have only themselves to blame for this blow back. They changed the rules to shepherd the nomination and confirmation of both Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, now it’s coming back to bite them.  They have politicized our judiciary, it started at the Supreme Court level but has now reached deep into the appellate judiciary as well.  Judges should not be political at all, but this is what it is now. It’s a very horrible development. Useless, clueless Senators, and I’m talking both sides now by the way, get to pick apart humans who just so happen to be nominated for a federal judgeship for life.  These are not elected positions, and these are not politicians.  Things in a judge’s past not related to legal precedent or any past encounters with the law should be off limits!  Somewhat ironic, these Democrats are going full tilt when they didn’t have a care in the world when Sotomayor or Kagan were nominated….no sir, they are thinkers and far smarter than any smelly Wal-Mart shopper who dared vote for Bush, McCain (well not anymore since he passed) Romney, or Trump.  Bottom line, ask questions regarding his/hers opinion on set legal precedent all you want, but these interruptions and demonstrations showing no respect for decorum are over the line. 

Take a look back at previous judges nominated by past Presidents and confirmed by the Senate; look closely at the vote totals.  One party seems to not like to confirm the other party’s nominated judges….looking at the Democrats here.  Heck Ruth Bader Ginsberg was confirmed like 96-0, and I don’t think anyone would call her a conservative!  But Clarence Thomas…..Democrats decided there was no way a black conservative could be nominated and confirmed so they went on a “high tech lynching” Thomas’ words not mine, and he went on to be confirmed 52-48.  With Ted “Chappaquiddick” Kennedy leading the charge.  Neil Gorsuch replaced Antonin Scalia, so really no change on the court ideologically (more on this later) 55-45 even though he was rated more than qualified by non-partisan groups.  Don’t take my word for it look back at history, the Democrats seem to prefer to stonewall anyone from the other side.

Now on to the ideology of the Court, I love it when folks say its 5-4 conservatives with Kennedy as the swing vote.  Not true, not many rulings are 5-4 believe it or not, most tend to be 7-2 especially since Kagan and Sotomayor joined.  This is due to judges looking at past rulings and cases to dictate their rulings. The term constitutionalist or originalist applies here, when a case has been adjudicated such as Roe v Wade, the Supreme Court doesn’t just “vote on it” again.  The case has to first be ruled on in a court, then a federal appeals court (think the 9th Circuit) then the ruling of that 3 judge panel can be appealed to the Supreme Court.  Here is where a big hurdle comes into play. Before anything is even scheduled on the docket, the court needs to agree to hear the challenge, think death penalty cases, and the baker who refused service to the same sex couple.  The Court often rejects cases; appeals regarding cruel and unusual punishment regarding the death penalty seem to be the most common.  The reason for this is because most aspects of the death penalty have been well documented and finding a challenge these days will prove very difficult. If you need proof “democrat/liberal” justices also decline to halt the execution.  This is why our judiciary works so well at the highest levels. These justices do not contact the RNC or DNC to find out how to vote, too bad not a single Democrat adult sees it that way.  My point here being, a challenge to set law likely takes around 20 years to finally make it to the Supreme Court, and even then may not get a hearing, heck how many conservatives thought for certain the Unaffordable Care Act would be overturned?  It was a “republican” who voted with the four liberal judges, also see gay marriage.  This is because the judges decided set law was already in place and there was not precedent to overturn it.

Back to my central point, the Supreme Court is the final non-political arm of the government that we as Americans have to keep a check on those coconuts in DC.  The Democrats are making this confirmation process a political theater and it is very sad.  Having a Code Pink protestor interrupt thinking this judge will overturn Roe V Wade is just strange, the judges don’t vote….but then again liberalism is a disease so… I don’t know what they think.  In all seriousness I recommend watching/listening to oral arguments involving the Supreme Court, the justices usually interrupt the Solicitor General (works for the White House) or the opposing council, stating case law already having been ruled on…it’s very interesting, Ruth Bader Ginsburg usually just sleeps, but when you’re like 500 years old I guess you earn that right.  Oh by the way, the justices don’t “vote” they form their own legal opinion based on prior rulings and look for a consensus for a majority.  When they form a consensus, the Chief Justice John Roberts (no relation to “The Chief Blogger”) who I believe is a satirical idiot writes the opinion for the Court, sometimes he can delegate this to an associate justice.  If there is a dissenting opinion from the justices, they choose a justice to write the opposition, sometimes there can be multiple differing dissentions, in some cases justices arguing it went too far, and didn’t go far enough.

Don’t try to explain this to a liberal, they just assume Kavanaugh is a fire breathing, Roe V Wade opposing, gay marriage taking awaying, don’t need to cake baking, conservative who is retarded.  He is so dumb he will be calling any Republican current or past president to find out how he should “vote” because he obviously cannot think for himself.  Gorsuch will be doing the same by the way.  Anyway it’s fun to watch this circus, literally unfold.  My prediction….55-45 Kavanaugh is confirmed, maybe more so that now we have a real conservative….listen up Ted Cruz supporting sheep from CRA, John Kyle is back as a Senator from Arizona, so 52-48 at least, if that happens look for some GOP gains in November.

See you soon,


Posted by william on 09/06 at 08:11 AM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Wednesday, July 11, 2018

Democrat Future Bleak after Janus

The Supreme Court ruling that struck down unions from requiring non-members to pay dues as a condition of employment is bigger than most people realize. Folks, the Court threw a thermonuclear grenade into the status quo political arrangement.

I’m going to tie three different threads together as we discuss this issue. As the adage goes, “Follow the money.”

First, the amount of money collected in dues just in the State of California is staggeringly large. I knew that combined the California Teachers Association (CTA) and Service Employees Union International (SEIU) collected about $625 million during each two year election cycle but today I learned this is peanuts.

Based primarily on publicly disclosed 2016 form 990s along with information obtained from their individual websites, in aggregate, California’s major public sector unions are estimated to be collecting over $900 million per year

Because there are undoubtedly smaller and less visible public sector unions operating in California, this number may be conservative. The number is also possibly understated because when making assumptions, conservative estimates were always applied. This was the done when estimating average membership dues in nearly all cases, and also with respect to total membership.

California’s Major Government Unions Collect At Least $900 Million Per Year

Yeah, you read that right, 900 million dollars a year is the conservative estimate. And as of now they get zero dollars unless they can convince people to join. Now multiply these numbers all across the other states and the Democrats just lost the gravy train. They and their financial backers have lost billions of dollars. Folks, they will not get all these people back on the union rolls; ever.

The implications for the political environment are huge. The most immediate result will be the congressional elections in November; especially the Senate. Democrats have to defend ten seats in states where Trump won. Without funding, their job just to keep these seats let alone gain anything has become all but impossible. Democrats will have to spend all their cash to keep from losing more seats in the Senate. Becoming the majority is almost mathematically impossible. Furthermore, once the elections are over, they and their special interests will be out of cash.

Against this background, take a look at the Supreme Court. The urgency of the smear campaign against the nominee now comes into sharper focus. It doesn’t matter who Trump put up, they have to oppose him. Again, it takes vast amounts of cash to run this campaign against Brett Kavanaugh. Again, this cash cannot be easily replaced.

Following the November election, Republicans will likely gain a few seats in the Senate.
Fox Business even agrees with me on this assertion. This from Stuart Varney:

Is it possible? A red wave coming, to the Senate? The Republicans pick up seats, increase their majority?

It’s possible, and because of Judge Kavanaugh, it’s probable!

Kavanaugh could make red wave probable in Senate come November: Varney

And this is where things get really interesting.

Justice Ginsburg is at the end of her time both on the Court and on this planet. She’s 85 and in poor health. If Democrats had any strategic thinkers on their team, they would have replaced Ginsburg while Obama was President. This would have assured a young Liberal on the court for the next 30 years or so. But they were so cocksure that Hillary Clinton would win that this never happened. This theme has been voiced twice in the last few days. First by Liz Peek on Fox and then by Rush Limbaugh.


Liz Peek: Democrats are furious about Trump and the Supreme Court – They have only Obama to blame

Limbaugh: Dems blundered by not having Ginsburg retire

If Republicans can pick up two or three seats in the Senate, Trump can appoint a full throated conservative to the Court that everyone knows will vote to overturn Roe v Wade and there will not be a damned thing that Susan Collins and her fellow pro-abortion Republicans can do about it. Look for a female Catholic to be nominated to replace Ginsburg.

Oh, this also explains the logic of putting up Brett Kavanaugh to replace Kennedy.

Posted by william on 07/11 at 12:35 PM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Tuesday, July 10, 2018

Kids saved from Cave

Reports are in this morning that the Thailand soccer team is saved from the cave they were trapped in for several weeks. The twelve boys and coach are all safe. Some rescue workers remain inside and must still find their way out. The fact that only one rescue worker lost his life and the whole group was recovered alive is a miracle.

Wild Boars soccer team

The dramatic three-day rescue of a Thai youth soccer team that had been stuck in a flooded cave came to an end Tuesday when the last boy and the team’s coach were plucked from the underground cavern—more than two weeks after they became trapped, Navy officials said.

The Thai Navy SEALS said on Facebook all 12 boys from the team and the team’s coach were out of the cave. Four rescuers, a doctor and three Navy SEALS remained inside.

Entire Thai soccer team, coach freed from cave after daring rescue, Navy says

The linked article is worth a read just to see the illustrations of what it took to get the kids out.

Photo inside cave

As this drama has been unfolding over the last several days, I began wondering about children’s safety in a different sort of cave. One that was warm, and actually has a steady supply of food and water. Sadly, in our supposedly civilized and medically advanced country, the fatality rate for these children during most of my lifetime has been over thirty percent.

I think a death rate from any cause approaching one in three is unacceptable. Doubly so when it is totally preventable by just letting nature take its course. But herein is the problem, folks don’t want to do that.

That’s where a guy like Donald Trump comes into the picture. You see, Trump is concerned about this issue and would like to do something about it. That’s why last night he nominated Brett Kavanaugh to the US Supreme Court. Kavanaugh may not be the first choice of many conservatives but he has a strong track record of reigning-in the power of the federal bureaucracy.

In the first, he found the Consumer Finance Protection Board (CFPB) violated the Constitution because it vested all power over consumer finance in the country in one person, but insulated him from removal by the president.

In the second, he struck down a new federal accounting board, because it too was insulated from presidential control, even though Article II of the Constitution vests the president, and the president alone, with the duty to see that “the Laws be Faithfully Executed.”

In both cases, Kavanaugh has made clear that he would put the text and history of the Constitution first, and mistaken precedent second, which should cheer the hearts of conservatives.

Trump’s Supreme Court pick: Democrats will fight hard to stop Kavanaugh but he has few vulnerabilities

With at least two more picks left (replacing Thomas and Ginsberg), Trump will fundamentally reshape the Court so that children are safe and protected in their mother’s womb. Yes, California and New York may not be safe for unborn children when Roe is toppled but for many, there will be states of refuge where life and not selfishness are the values of the land.

Ruling against a radical abortion claim. In his one foray into the abortion arena, in a very contentious recent case involving a pregnant unaccompanied-alien minor being held in HHS custody, Kavanaugh objected to his court’s grant of relief to the minor. In his dissent, he complained that the majority concocted “a constitutional principle as novel as it is wrong: a new right for unlawful immigrant minors in U.S. Government detention to obtain immediate abortion on demand.” The majority’s decision, he said, “represents a radical extension of the Supreme Court’s abortion jurisprudence.”

Trump Picks Brett Kavanaugh

Judge Kavanaugh is admittedly a “safe” choice for Trump but he should be more solidly conservative than Anthony Kennedy. The real fight will be to replace Ginsberg and give conservatives and constitutionalists a super majority on the Court.

At the end of his administration, Trump will leave the country better off than it was when he took office. If his Court picks are as good as I hope then perhaps the scourge of surgical abortion will go the way of slavery. As the good doctor once said, “A person is a person no matter how small.”


Posted by william on 07/10 at 06:35 AM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Monday, July 09, 2018

CRA Failed To Stop Trump Nominee

By “X” the man with no name

The call to action was apparently not answered; chalk this up as another failure from the CRA and its “leadership.”  It is unknown at this time how many calls were made to the White House or to the congressional switchboard, but the effort was a failure none the less.  Perhaps CRA President Thomas N Hudson is expecting too much from a membership composed mostly of geriatric white guys with arthritic fingers and rotary dial telephones. The bottom line is that Hudson put out an urgent call for action, but the membership failed to deliver. 

Rumor has it the “Sith Lord” made many phone calls from both cell and landline phones, including his wife’s phone. As per usual, he was a good soldier in the effort. Perhaps he had his apprentice applicants make calls from the CRA call center since he is reluctant to put his actual name on anything except letters to the RNC opposing Douglas Ose.  The “Drunken Jedi” was enjoying Happy Hour over the last 72 hours and as a result was in a normal state of inebriation, therefore no phone calls from him.  The “Wookie” didn’t even know there was a vacancy on said Supreme Court because he thought the “Supreme Court” was a new item at Taco Bell in honor of the Sacramento Kings.  Oh, by the way these are your three choices for President of CRA folks, just imagine the debates among these three; one is inept, one is clueless, and one is a psycho and I can’t figure out who is who!

CRA motivational flyer as seen at Stop Trump call center

Let’s just chalk this up as another embarrassing loss for the CRA and whatever is left of its membership.  Membership is down substantially over the years, entire counties no longer have units, it’s just gawd awful what’s happened under the current board.  This is exhibit A folks of what happens when you try to take stands against what the people actually want, and as a result, members have been fleeing this stumbling organization.  Sadly, this group opposed Donald Trump every step of the way and honestly, most probably think there was collusion with Russia…nope.  Blog Father and I have really right news for you….Trump will get re-elected in 2020.  Here is my crying towel….womp womp!

That’s right folks, while most are celebrating a 5-4 conservative edge on the court, this band of losers wants Trump gone.  Make no mistake about it, the nominee will easily clear 55 votes with at least four democrats voting to confirm.  Yet still this band of losers can’t stand the man, thinking that one Theodore Cruz was unfairly denied the nomination. Maybe Trump wasn’t born here, and you guys can use that route to get him impeached?  Never mind the fact if these idiots had their way it would be a 5-4 liberal edge on the court, thankfully the masses voted for Trump and it’s a moot point.

Serious analysis now; we can count on the “Sith Lord” to drum up opposition like he tried to against the nominee, despite remaining on the sidelines.  Rumor has it his groin has been bothering him for straddling the political fence for almost 50 years.  No word on the many dead carcasses of suicide bombers he has riled up over the years.  The “Wookie” still thinks Barack Obama is our president and is in disbelief he would nominate 2 conservatives to the court.  Much like the Sith Lord, he still thinks Ted Cruz is up for president in November.  The “drunken Jedi” was asked for comment but his commentary was undecipherable due to the fact it was not certain which was higher his BAC of the percentage of votes Travis Allen got for Governor.  He said something along the lines of he wasn’t sure that it was absolutely Absolut, I guess a reference to Vodka. 

But here is a win for the CRA, a photo of Theodore Cruz, and in the words of Frankie Vallie and the 4 seasons….”Can’t take my eyes off of you!”

Ted Cruz—CRA Savior

Until Next time,


Posted by william on 07/09 at 06:00 PM
Supreme CourtPermalink

What If Trump Picked Judge Judy?

As we await President Trump’s announcement of who he will nominate to the Supreme Court to replace Anthony Kennedy we can’t help but wonder if…

In a move that sent shockwaves thru the Washington Establishment, President Trump today announced that he was nominating Judge Judy to the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court nominee—Judge Judy

Judge Judy is well known for her blunt and straight forward manner in resolving disagreements between parties. Judy has agreed to be nominated in exchange for two conditions, first, the proceedings of the Court are to be televised on a cable channel with higher ratings than C-Span. Currently AMC network is the leading contender, and their only condition is that Justice Ginsburg appear in the season nine episode of The Walking Dead where Rick Grimes meets his fate.

Rick Grimes meets Justice Ginsburg on TWD

Judy’s other condition is that the Court room be remodeled. She wants to allow natural sunlight into the room and soften the colors of the wood paneling. She also wanted to “add some damn flowers into this place.” Judy is not known for working as part of an ensemble cast but is willing to give it a try. She also is retaining the right to work during her off time on her television show.

Her views on abortion are not well known. The closest anyone has gotten was an exchange she had on her show a few years back.

She asked a young woman, “If you didn’t get knock-up by this scumbag then you wouldn’t be here asking for child support.”

Her response was, “But he said he loved me.”

Judy then retorted, “And you believed him when he said he would leave his wife for you? Grow-up.” Then she turned to the camera and said, “Where the hell do we find these cases? Walmart?”

Judy then ordered the baby to be put up for adoption and the man to get a vasectomy in exchange for not paying 18 years of child support.

Newt Gingrich reportedly likes the pick and said, “Judy is a kindred spirit to President Trump and will reflect the administration’s new tone of calling it like it is. I just hope she doesn’t have a Twitter account.”

Senator Chuck Schumer met with Judge Judy and described the meeting as akin to two New Yorker’s talking baseball over a few beers. “Judy is a spunky lady and would be an interesting addition to the bench.” He then added, “We have wanted the Court televised for years and now that may actually happen. The transparency that would give the Court makes supporting Judge Judy a good move for my fellow Senators.”

California Senator Diane Feinstein was less supportive. “Judge Judy has a track record of supporting adoption so I must question whether she truly supports a woman’s choice.”

Senate leadership has set confirmation hearings to begin after the summer recess when Congress meets after Labor Day.


Posted by william on 07/09 at 06:18 AM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Thursday, June 28, 2018

CRA Urgent Call to Action!

By “X” the man with no name

This communique just in…

28 JUN 2018

President Hudson wants everyone to know the Board of Directors put out an urgent call for help yesterday due to the dramatic event of a Supreme Court Justice retiring.  The retirement took everyone by surprise, however we must resist the notion Trump could appoint someone not named Ted Cruz!  So we need a swift call to action, every member of CRA, grab your twitter account, or even create a burner account if need be, and tweet relentlessly at the President @Potus & @RealDonaldTrump.  This seems to be the best way of reaching him, you could also call the White House directly.  Tell Donald Trump, no more squishy RINO Neil Gorsuch types, we want a red blooded American whose love for Country supersedes all….Ted Cruz.

Ted Cruz—American needs you more than ever

Also call your Senators, Dianne Feinstein and Kamala Harris and make sure they know that you stand with them in regard to blocking any Trump nominee that isn’t Ted Cruz!  These are trying times for our country and we can leave little to chance.  Also let us all call Ted Cruz as well to make sure he is fully on board, block any nominee that isn’t himself!  Or as we no longer CRA members call it, just continue voting no on everything.

Again this is not a test, this is a stage 5 crisis!


Posted by william on 06/28 at 10:49 AM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Friday, June 29, 2012

Reflection of the court and Obama Care

Writer and theologian Francis A Schaeffer (30 January 1912 – 15 May 1984) declared that we are living in the Post-Christian West. This was the impetus for his book How Should We Then Live? The Rise and Decline of Western Thought and Culture (1976). The Court ruling today has pushed us further down the road of Western decline to the era of Post Constitutional America. The phrase was popularized in the book Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America (2012) by Mark Levin. The premise of Ameritopia is that people will trade constitutionalism for utopianism. While I haven’t read the book, the contrast would seem to explain the environmental movement and parts of the welfare state. This would dovetail nicely with the Obama agenda.

Scoffers think that conservatives like me are way off base about the ramifications of today’s Supreme Court decision on Obama Care. I would like to use a few illustrations to express my view of what happened today. All analogies breakdown at some point but here are a few good ones to try to share my point of view.

I spent over two decades in various parts of the Episcopal Church. The last two years was with outcasts from ECUSA (Protestant Episcopal Church). In the 1979 Prayer Book, much of the theological heritage that would get in the way of theological liberalism was relegated to the section in the back of the book for historical documents. These documents contained ideas contrary or embarrassing to the atheists in robes that pretend to be representatives of Jesus Christ. In the same way, the Supreme Court has relegated the last shreds of the Constitution to the index in the back of the history books on the American experiment.

Another way to explain this decision is from the book that I just finished called Ben Hur. Written in 1880 by Civil War General Lew Wallace, the book bears little resemblance to any of the subsequent movies. Towards the end of the book, Judah—the character played by Charlton Heston—enters Jerusalem to find that Jesus had been tried and convicted in the dead of night and that the injustice of his arrest was upheld and compounded by both Pontius Pilot and Herod. Judah tries to rally his troops to stop the proceedings only to find his men were active participants in the crowd yelling “Crucify him”. In much the same way, the injustice of Obama Care was upheld by those sitting in judgment of the law when they clearly knew that they were partaking of a grievous evil for the sake of political expediency. Judge Roberts played both Judas and Herod in this tragedy.

Another illustration is the conflict between Jesus and the religious rulers of his day. The leader in the time of Christ had so distorted the Law that it no longer bore any resemblance to the writings of Moses. Jesus was the one that spoke with Moses in the burning bush but when he tried to explain the Law to the rulers of his day they tried to stone him for blasphemy. They had so distorted and perverted justice that they could no longer recognize it. They called evil “good” and good “evil”.

My last illustration to explain today’s ruling is lethal exposure to radiation. You can’t see it, smell it or taste it but by the time you know it happened you are already dead. Yes you may walk around for a few minutes, hours or days but the effects are irreversible because by the time you exhibit symptoms the damage has been done. The ruling today forever laid to rest the concept that the national government has any limits. The government now has license to tell us what to buy, what to eat, where to live, what to drive and to literally determine how long we should live. Today the State declared itself as our “god”. It will take a while for this new found power to manifest itself to much of the populous but the nanny government of Michael Bloomberg has been pumped full of steroids and granted a nationwide franchise. The ruling elites now have the tools to bring us the dystopian worlds of 1984, Brave New World and Atlas Shrugged. The Republic is dead and it will take a period of time before the mind of the populous notices the death of the body politic. (If they have their “bread” will they even care?)

We often have used the analogy of the frog in the boiling pot dying as the heat has been turned up ever so gradually over time. The frog is dead before it realizes that it is boiling. Well today the water evaporated out of the pot and much of our populous yawned.

The words of Deuteronomy 28 verses 15 thru 68 echoed in my head all day today. Verse 15 reads,

But if you will not obey the voice of the LORD your God or be careful to do all his commandments and his statutes that I command you today, then all these curses shall come upon you and overtake you.

Today’s decision may be an historic day but it is not one to be celebrated. The Rule of Law and the Constitution received an ignoble end.

Posted by william on 06/29 at 05:01 AM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Thursday, June 28, 2012

SCOTUS Kills Republic

The United States of America July 4, 1776 - June 28, 2012 R.I.P.
Socialist Amerika created by judicial tyrannyJune 28, 2012

Posted by william on 06/28 at 01:55 PM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

Dobson Should Embrace Rudy

Conservatives are once again poised to assemble their famous “circular firing squad” and should Rudy Giuliani emerge as the Republican presidential candidate, they plan on pulling the trigger.

James Dobson and a group of other evangelicals are threatening to throw their support to a third party candidate—to be named later—if Rudy is the nominee. This is the result of Rudy’s longtime support of legalized abortion. This smacks of the Ross Perot effort in 1992, which resulted in the election of Bill Clinton. Clinton won with 43 percent of the vote.

This presidential cycle will likely see a credible third party challenger from the Left due to the dissatisfaction of the anti-war fanatics. Dobson’s gambit will likely be a pale imitation of their efforts. If Dobson and company put up a third party challenger, it will be to the detriment of evangelicals and when it fails, it will justify the marginalization of social conservatives in future public policy debates.

Rudy is better on the war than any of the Democrats. If we are dead or in economic ruins, then all the social policies that we spend so much time fighting about won’t matter because we won’t be here to have the debate. Our national existence is on the line in 2008. Once the Sword of Islam is dealt with then we will have to time to look at these other issues.

Furthermore, should Rudy appoint the kind of judges that he says, we might end-up with Roe v Wade being gutted regardless of what Rudy said on the campaign trail. Why? Simple really. The kind of judges that support the War on Terror and law & order issues will tend to be the strict constructionist judges that would favor curtailing the overreaching intrusion of the courts beyond the limits of the Constitution.

Rudy certainly couldn’t pick any worse than did Reagan and Bush senior. Republicans have a terrible track record of picking justices for the Court. Picking judges reminds me of the old joke about marriage. It has been said that marriage is like fishing, you don’t really know what you caught until you get it in the boat. Ditto for Supreme Court judges.

The irony of Dobson’s position is that to get the result he wants, his best chance is to join with Rudy.

Posted by william on 10/03 at 12:10 PM
News & PoliticsSupreme CourtPermalink

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

South Dakota Abortion Ban: Bane or Blessing?

South Dakota has passed the most restrictive abortion ban in the country. Its authors have stated that they intend this to be a direct challenge to the 1973 Supreme Court decision of Roe v Wade.

This is the most divisive issue to hit the Conservative wing of the Republican Party since Harriett Miers was nominated to the Supreme Court. Many are saying that this is either a premature effort that will yield nothing or a folly that will only give red meat to the Democrats as we approach the mid term elections this year and leading up to the next presidential primaries in 2008.

Others argue that Roe should be challenged directly. It will be at least three years before the High Court will hear the case. This is plenty of time for President Bush to get one more nomination on the Court before he leaves office.

Those uncomfortable with this legislation say that the Court will simply refuse to hear the case. They argue that without the insertion of the standard “Exception Clause” i.e. rape, incest and life of the mother this whole exercise is d.o.a.

Since there is no case yet, it is difficult to see how this will play-out. My purpose in writing this blog entry is to flesh-out arguments that I don’t hear anyone else talking about since this story hit the news late last week.

First, let’s see what Mississippi and any other Conservative states might be able to pass. The Supreme Court bundled three cases together when they heard arguments on Roe v Wade. I’m sure they will do the same with this batch of challenges to Roe. If Mississippi gives their bill the generally accepted “Exception Clause” language, I think these nervous folks will calm down.

Second, there is the issue before the Court right now of “partial-birth” abortion. The ban on this type of abortion is perfectly acceptable with the majority decision in Roe but is considered by abortion supporters as a curtailment of abortion rights as they stand now. The wording of this decision will be a harbinger of where the Court is heading.

Third, South Dakota has definite State’s Right grounds to argue the Constitutionality of their bill. Additionally, because of how Roe has been implemented, there is state money (our tax dollars) involved in subsidizing the abortion industry.

Four, the “Exception Clause” is mostly a strawman argument (smoke screen) that allows prolifers to appear compassionate. In reality it makes their arguments opposing abortion weaker.

Please note that most abortions are retroactive birth control and abortions for rape and incest are statistically insignificant.

Let’s suppose that there is a pregnancy as the result of rape or incest. How would the procedure work to allow the woman to get an abortion?
Do you just take her word that this is how she got pregnant? Is it necessary for her to file a police report first? If a guy is prosecuted for such a crime, the child would be full term before the courts could adjudicate the matter. This leaves you with the sticky problem of what if the guy is found not guilt, and she had the abortion? Has she committed perjury or murder or what?

This line of reasoning not only leads to the wilderness of moral relativism but right back to where we are now. For it is not strictly Roe v Wade that gives us the current abortion climate, but the companion case released the same day as Roe, January 22, 1973. Roe allows abortion for the health of the mother, while in Doe v Bolton, we get the definition of health as convenience.

The medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors - physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age - relevant to the wellbeing of the patient. All these factors may relate to health.

Any health exemption without a definition that closes this loophole is worthless in the hands of an activist judiciary.

Five, for those of you that want this issue to stop being political, I have one word of advice. Get the taxpayer subsidies out of the abortion decision and most of this abortion argument would disappear. I don’t what my money killing little black children just because the founder of Planned Parenthood though all blacks are “weeds” and hung-out with the German freaks that gave us the Nazi Holocaust. Children are God’s creation not things that we throw away.

Lastly, the lies of the pro-abortion movement are wearing thin with many. It is hard to keep the same old lies going forward decade after decade. The right balance of prayer and repentance will put this morbid practice in the dust bin of history soon enough.



Posted by william on 03/08 at 04:26 AM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Court to Hear Partial Birth Abortion Case Again

With respect to the State’s important and legitimate interest in potential life, the “compelling” point is at viability. This is so because the fetus then presumably has the capability of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb. State regulation protective of fetal life after viability thus has both logical and biological justifications. If the State is interested in protecting fetal life after viability, it may go so far as to proscribe abortion during that period, except when it is necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.
Majority decision Roe v Wade

Proscribe��? is defined as “to condemn or forbid as harmful or unlawful: prohibit��?.

Therefore the majority opinion says that the State has the right to restrict abortion after viability. After viability is when the abortion procedure called “partial birth��? is done.

This form of late term abortion is when the baby’s feet are pulled through the birth canal and a device is inserted into the birth canal that either crushes or punctures the baby’s skull before the head has left the inside of the mother. This of course results in the mother giving birth to an already dead child.

It is barbaric that anyone would argue that you have a Constitutional right to kill a child in this manner but that is exactly what abortion supporters are arguing. Thankfully this issue is going before the Supreme Court where they will have a chance to reverse some of the damage they have inflicted on our society.

Maybe they will get it right this time and stop this form of premeditated murder.


Posted by william on 02/21 at 06:24 PM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Thursday, February 02, 2006

John Danforth Whines in Washington Post


A friend e-mailed me a copy of the Washington Post  interview with former Senator John Danforth. This article advocates that moderate Christians should rise-up to oppose the Christian Right and their involvement in the Republican Party.

Danforth cites such issues as gay marriage, posting the Ten Commandments, Terri Schiavo, embryonic stem cell research and other social issues as needing the wisdom of moderate voices. OK what is a moderate position on such issues?

Let�s look at the issues.
Is it ok to kill unborn babies as a form of retroactive birth control?
Is it ok to conceive children to harvest their body parts in the name of science?
Is it ok to have religion in the public square?
Is it ok to honestly acknowledge the intellectual and moral foundations of our Founding Fathers?
Is marriage between a man and woman the best way to raise children?
Is forcing acceptance of homosexuality upon me and my family a good thing?

Obviously there is no such thing as a �moderate� position on these and other issues.

You are either for or against such issues. They are either right or wrong. The one thing most of these issues have in common is that they are being advanced by judicial legislation and not the normal Constitutional processes that are setup under our form of government.

There was a time when the Episcopal Church was called the conscience of the Republican Party. Since then the Episcopal Church-in which Senator Danforth serves as an ordained minister-has left the Orthodox Christian Faith and descended into heresy.

The Christian Right is involved in politics to defend itself from the attacks of Democrats and liberal (moderate) Republicans. Now that the tide is turning and the Senator and his allies are losing, they are wandering about the country like a roaring lion seeking whom they may devour. (see 1 Peter 5:8)

Now, their last vestige of power, the judicial branch of our government, is shifting away from judicial activism and towards a strict constructionist view. This coupled with more minorities in the middle and upper classes and the demise of the Roosevelt era Democrats by attrition has left the political Left in demographic hell for at least the balance of the good Senator�s lifetime.

Once this truth has truly taken hold within the Democratic leadership, look for many of the Dinosaur Democrats to find reasons not to run for re-election.

Posted by william on 02/02 at 05:32 PM
Christianity & ReligionNews & PoliticsSupreme CourtPermalink

Saturday, January 21, 2006

This Rocks!


A friend sent this to me today.

Posted by william on 01/21 at 10:42 PM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Pompous Politicians Tarnish Senate Hearings

Samuel Alito is rapidly moving to confirmation as an Associate Justice on the US Supreme Court. The Democrats on the Judiciary Committee have succeeded only in using their allotted time for questioning the nominee as a platform for beating their own chests and pontificating on their own virtues. Judge Alito is treated as irrelevant to the whole proceedings. There is no honest effort being made to ask any meaningful questions of the Judge or to learn more about his views.

Mercifully, this dog and pony show is drawing to a conclusion. The biggest casualty in the proceedings are the pundits who have to endure endless hours of senile and irrelevant Democrats yearning for the good old days when they were respected and revered as the custodians of the national government and defenders of the Constitution. Fortunately, the fraud and myth of FDR is almost behind us now as the �greatest generation� slowly goes on to their eternal reward.

Regrettably, there is not a single Democrat in the Senate that believes the Constitution is worth defending any more. The Constitution is viewed as the Democrats biggest obstacle to establishing a socialist, workers paradise in the United States. They harbor a perverted fantasy that they can engineer a society that works the way the Soviet Union would have if they had been in charge.

When an office holder takes their oath to �protect and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies foreign and domestic� they are at a minimum promising to keep us safe from the domestic threat posed by the Democrats. Sadly our nation appears to be infected with the same cancer that led to the fall of Rome two millennia ago.


Posted by william on 01/11 at 05:45 PM
Supreme CourtPermalink

Tuesday, November 01, 2005

Bush Serves-up �Red Meat� to the Republican Base

Posted by william on 11/01 at 12:41 AM
Supreme CourtPermalink
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >